This is excellent news, IMO. All those guys are not only easily replaceable in our system, but they also are probably at peak value right now, meaning the return will never be better.

 

I hope we do move all those guys mentioned, except Hermida. Should be a fun off season.

 

Agreed

'05/'06 was a firesale, the very definition of a firesale. We just had a GM who picked good prospects in doing it. That was still a good team, they weren't trading to improve, and it is flat out LUCK that they were so good in '06. If the other teams knew the prospects they gave up were going to pan out that well, do you think they ever would have considered trading them?

 

Just because they were good trades, doesn't make it any less of a firesale.

 

This however, I wouldn't call this a firesale. We're losing players who really haven't proven much yet in the bigs, for more prospects. In '05, we gave away solid veterans who were getting paid fair value because we wanted to be cheap.

'05/'06 was a firesale, the very definition of a firesale. We just had a GM who picked good prospects in doing it. That was still a good team, they weren't trading to improve, and it is flat out LUCK that they were so good in '06. If the other teams knew the prospects they gave up were going to pan out that well, do you think they ever would have considered trading them?

 

Just because they were good trades, doesn't make it any less of a firesale.

 

This however, I wouldn't call this a firesale. We're losing players who really haven't proven much yet in the bigs, for more prospects. In '05, we gave away solid veterans who were getting paid fair value because we wanted to be cheap.

Fire sale: a sale, as of assets, at reduced prices, in order to raise money quickly.

 

The prices of the assets is what dictates a fire sale. Seeing as there was nothing reduced about the prices of the guys we traded away (besides Castillo), that was not a fire sale.

'05/'06 was a firesale, the very definition of a firesale. We just had a GM who picked good prospects in doing it. That was still a good team, they weren't trading to improve, and it is flat out LUCK that they were so good in '06. If the other teams knew the prospects they gave up were going to pan out that well, do you think they ever would have considered trading them?

 

Just because they were good trades, doesn't make it any less of a firesale.

 

This however, I wouldn't call this a firesale. We're losing players who really haven't proven much yet in the bigs, for more prospects. In '05, we gave away solid veterans who were getting paid fair value because we wanted to be cheap.

Fire sale: a sale, as of assets, at reduced prices, in order to raise money quickly.

 

The prices of the assets is what dictates a fire sale. Seeing as there was nothing reduced about the prices of the guys we traded away (besides Castillo), that was not a fire sale.

 

I don't have time to look through and see how highly rated the prospects were that we got from each individual trade, but considering that everyone in baseball knew we had to get rid of them, I highly doubt we got as much as we could have out of every trade (even if they did pan out well in a lot of cases). So to me, unless you can prove we got great value AT THAT TIME, it was definitely a firesale to me.

 

I mean, you're basically arguing that Beinfest got great value out of every deal at the time of the deal. To do that, he'd have to have leverage... how much leverage can you really have when everyone in baseball knows you had to cut payroll? I don't buy that at all. Nobody expected the '06 Marlins to be a good team, they were expected to lose 100 games. Nobody thought Beinfest got good value AT THE TIME of his deals. If those prospects didn't pan out and the ones in 1998 did, would you reverse your stance? We were in the same situation both times, the SAME.

The boston redsoxs do this, and their famed for being "smart" because they don't resign players for big amounts of money and instead go to prospects

 

when we do it, it's a fire sale

 

f***ING STUPID ass talking heads

 

/notstopping

 

/irratable with how today's game is going

The boston redsoxs do this, and their famed for being "smart" because they don't resign players for big amounts of money and instead go to prospects

 

when we do it, it's a fire sale

 

f***ING STUPID ass talking heads

 

/notstopping

 

/irratable with how today's game is going

 

What we're doing this offseason is smart, and I have no problem with it.

 

What we did in '05 to '06: Firesale. No other way around it. We gave up good to great players, in the middle of their primes, at reduced prices, we were at a position of weakness in our bargaining because everyone knew we had to cut salary. Our GM just did a great job picking the prospects he collected.

The boston redsoxs do this, and their famed for being "smart" because they don't resign players for big amounts of money and instead go to prospects

 

when we do it, it's a fire sale

 

f***ING STUPID ass talking heads

 

/notstopping

 

/irratable with how today's game is going

 

What we're doing this offseason is smart, and I have no problem with it.

 

What we did in '05 to '06: Firesale. No other way around it. We gave up good to great players, in the middle of their primes, at reduced prices, we were at a position of weakness in our bargaining because everyone knew we had to cut salary. Our GM just did a great job picking the prospects he collected.

 

I agree

 

But they labeled trading Miguel Cabrera as a firesale

 

Now they're already labeling this offseason as a firesale

 

That's what I find stupid.

Who really cares? It should be obvious that this current roster of players is not gonna get it done. Guys like Jacobs, Willingham, Ross, and Uggla have extreme flaws and are players we cannot rely on. I can only PRAY TO GOD that they have a roster turn over....because if you keep the same guys, the same thing is gonna happen next year.

The boston redsoxs do this, and their famed for being "smart" because they don't resign players for big amounts of money and instead go to prospects

 

when we do it, it's a fire sale

 

f***ING STUPID ass talking heads

 

/notstopping

 

/irratable with how today's game is going

 

What we're doing this offseason is smart, and I have no problem with it.

 

What we did in '05 to '06: Firesale. No other way around it. We gave up good to great players, in the middle of their primes, at reduced prices, we were at a position of weakness in our bargaining because everyone knew we had to cut salary. Our GM just did a great job picking the prospects he collected.

 

I agree

 

But they labeled trading Miguel Cabrera as a firesale

 

Now they're already labeling this offseason as a firesale

 

That's what I find stupid.

 

This offseason isn't a firesale because we haven't even started paying these players yet, and none of them look like can't miss guys, they all have plenty of flaws.

 

The Cabrera trade can't be a firesale, because it was only 1 trade (although it did feature 2 players). I will say the value on that deal is looking meh so far, but at the time it looked like pretty good value for these 2 guys, Detroit only made the deal because they felt they were on the cusp of winning it all.

'05/'06 was a firesale, the very definition of a firesale. We just had a GM who picked good prospects in doing it. That was still a good team, they weren't trading to improve, and it is flat out LUCK that they were so good in '06. If the other teams knew the prospects they gave up were going to pan out that well, do you think they ever would have considered trading them?

 

Just because they were good trades, doesn't make it any less of a firesale.

 

This however, I wouldn't call this a firesale. We're losing players who really haven't proven much yet in the bigs, for more prospects. In '05, we gave away solid veterans who were getting paid fair value because we wanted to be cheap.

Fire sale: a sale, as of assets, at reduced prices, in order to raise money quickly.

 

The prices of the assets is what dictates a fire sale. Seeing as there was nothing reduced about the prices of the guys we traded away (besides Castillo), that was not a fire sale.

 

I don't have time to look through and see how highly rated the prospects were that we got from each individual trade, but considering that everyone in baseball knew we had to get rid of them, I highly doubt we got as much as we could have out of every trade (even if they did pan out well in a lot of cases). So to me, unless you can prove we got great value AT THAT TIME, it was definitely a firesale to me.

 

I mean, you're basically arguing that Beinfest got great value out of every deal at the time of the deal. To do that, he'd have to have leverage... how much leverage can you really have when everyone in baseball knows you had to cut payroll? I don't buy that at all. Nobody expected the '06 Marlins to be a good team, they were expected to lose 100 games. Nobody thought Beinfest got good value AT THE TIME of his deals. If those prospects didn't pan out and the ones in 1998 did, would you reverse your stance? We were in the same situation both times, the SAME.

Not every deal, but I feel we got a good to great deal out of every trade but Castillo's.

 

And it was a completely different situation.

 

The 1997 team had just won the World Series and were never given a chance to win again. Also, the team was making a ton of money and had a solid fan base.

 

The 2003 team had 2 years after their championship to both make it back to the playoffs and bring in the fans. Neither happened and the team was an economic black hole (mostly because the Marlins get no money from parking or concessions).

 

Also, for the record, only Burnett and D-Lee were anywhere near high rated prospects, everyone else was either guys with no futures or journeymen.

This better happen. Uggla, Jacobs, Olsen, Gregg and Willingham all gotta go.

'05/'06 was a firesale, the very definition of a firesale. We just had a GM who picked good prospects in doing it. That was still a good team, they weren't trading to improve, and it is flat out LUCK that they were so good in '06. If the other teams knew the prospects they gave up were going to pan out that well, do you think they ever would have considered trading them?

 

Just because they were good trades, doesn't make it any less of a firesale.

 

This however, I wouldn't call this a firesale. We're losing players who really haven't proven much yet in the bigs, for more prospects. In '05, we gave away solid veterans who were getting paid fair value because we wanted to be cheap.

Fire sale: a sale, as of assets, at reduced prices, in order to raise money quickly.

 

The prices of the assets is what dictates a fire sale. Seeing as there was nothing reduced about the prices of the guys we traded away (besides Castillo), that was not a fire sale.

 

I don't have time to look through and see how highly rated the prospects were that we got from each individual trade, but considering that everyone in baseball knew we had to get rid of them, I highly doubt we got as much as we could have out of every trade (even if they did pan out well in a lot of cases). So to me, unless you can prove we got great value AT THAT TIME, it was definitely a firesale to me.

 

I mean, you're basically arguing that Beinfest got great value out of every deal at the time of the deal. To do that, he'd have to have leverage... how much leverage can you really have when everyone in baseball knows you had to cut payroll? I don't buy that at all. Nobody expected the '06 Marlins to be a good team, they were expected to lose 100 games. Nobody thought Beinfest got good value AT THE TIME of his deals. If those prospects didn't pan out and the ones in 1998 did, would you reverse your stance? We were in the same situation both times, the SAME.

Not every deal, but I feel we got a good to great deal out of every trade but Castillo's.

 

And it was a completely different situation.

 

The 1997 team had just won the World Series and were never given a chance to win again. Also, the team was making a ton of money and had a solid fan base.

 

The 2003 team had 2 years after their championship to both make it back to the playoffs and bring in the fans. Neither happened and the team was an economic black hole (mostly because the Marlins get no money from parking or concessions).

 

Also, for the record, only Burnett and D-Lee were anywhere near high rated prospects, everyone else was either guys with no futures or journeymen.

 

I just can't fathom how it isn't a firesale, when you are selling off players and everyone else knows it. Its not like Beinfest was in the drivers seat there, despite the deals he did manage to pull off.

 

If you trade away just a Delgado, a Lo Duca, a Burnett, a Beckett, a Lowell, just a couple of them, to shave a little payroll and improve your depth in the minors, thats a rebuild. If you give up your entire roster for youth, that is a firesale. And once again, I didn't see anyone calling them good trades at the time they were made.

 

EDIT: For example, there is talk about Toronto blowing up their team after this year. They haven't won jack, but I still hear it being referred to as a firesale. You don't have to be a good team just for it to be a firesale.

 

DOUBLE EDIT: And earlier in the thread, someone mentioned how it isn't called a firesale in the NFL. Obviously they aren't factoring in the difference between young players in the NFL and in MLB. In MLB, your youth might never pan out, and if it does usually takes several years to do so. So you can expect to be trash for several years.

 

In the NFL, your youth might never pan out, but if it does, usually shows signs immediately, and you can turn it around in 1 or 2 seasons with a team consisting of mostly first, second and third year players.

 

This is why a 1st round draft pick in the NFL is worth a star player, but in MLB you rarely even see draft picks traded. Nobody really knows what will happen with MLB draft picks, but you know an NFL player drafted in the first or second round is almost assured of being starter quality, with a good GM.

I just can't fathom how it isn't a firesale, when you are selling off players and everyone else knows it. Its not like Beinfest was in the drivers seat there, despite the deals he did manage to pull off.

 

If you trade away just a Delgado, a Lo Duca, a Burnett, a Beckett, a Lowell, just a couple of them, to shave a little payroll and improve your depth in the minors, thats a rebuild. If you give up your entire roster for youth, that is a firesale. And once again, I didn't see anyone calling them good trades at the time they were made.

It's because you are misusing the word fire sale. A fire sale has nothing to do with how much you sell, but what you sell it for.

 

And people did call them good trades, mostly people who were not Marlins fans, so they didn't have that bias. You can actually go back to threads from 2005 and, while there are ton of people screaming "THE SKY IS FALLING! F**K LORIA!", there were a few calm minds who actually broke down the trades and felt they were good ones.

 

Also, I was one of the few people who agreed with the "market correction".

its so simple

keep

Hanley

Hermida

Cantu

Uggla

Cody

Baker

Treanor

fredo

Olsen unless he wants like 4 mill

Entire Rotation

Lindstrom

Logan

Rhodes

maybe joe no or dw

 

realese or trade

every1 else

 

call up

maybin

gaby

dallas

miller

tucker

badenhop or RVH

and who ever else you can get

 

we should be great by 2010 2011

The 2003 team had 2 years after their championship to both make it back to the playoffs and bring in the fans. Neither happened and the team was an economic black hole (mostly because the Marlins get no money from parking or concessions).

 

A big bulk of the '03 team was kept together for two more years but they still lost a lot of key guys so they really weren't given a chance either. They didn't re-sign Pudge who was arguably the face of the franchise and IMO the MVP of that post season and Derrek Lee who hit 30 homers in '03 and was a gold glover. Other significant losses included Ugueth Urbina and Brad Penny midway through the '04 season. Any other team would have re-signed Pudge after what he did.

I just can't fathom how it isn't a firesale, when you are selling off players and everyone else knows it. Its not like Beinfest was in the drivers seat there, despite the deals he did manage to pull off.

 

If you trade away just a Delgado, a Lo Duca, a Burnett, a Beckett, a Lowell, just a couple of them, to shave a little payroll and improve your depth in the minors, thats a rebuild. If you give up your entire roster for youth, that is a firesale. And once again, I didn't see anyone calling them good trades at the time they were made.

It's because you are misusing the word fire sale. A fire sale has nothing to do with how much you sell, but what you sell it for.

 

And people did call them good trades, mostly people who were not Marlins fans, so they didn't have that bias. You can actually go back to threads from 2005 and, while there are ton of people screaming "THE SKY IS FALLING! F**K LORIA!", there were a few calm minds who actually broke down the trades and felt they were good ones.

 

Also, I was one of the few people who agreed with the "market correction".

 

I was a fan at the time, and even after reading up on the prospects, I wasn't happy with a lot of the deals. For example, the Beckett Lowell deal... I don't care how Hanley turned out, there is no way you can say that was a good trade for Florida at the time it was made. Beckett was a proven commodity, an absolute true #1 ace, a stud. Hanley and Anibal were highly rated prospects, but at best case scenario, they might become what Beckett already was.

 

The Beckett Lowell deal was made for money, it was not made to improve the team. We could be arguably a better team for the future now with Beckett and Lowell still even after Hanley and Anibal have somewhat panned out, but what if they didn't?

 

I think you're just playing the results a lot here. What if most of these prospects didn't pan out the way they have? Where does that leave us? Nobody would call them good trades. Prospects are prospects, and everyone in baseball knows they are hit or miss... plenty of the guys we traded were proven veterans, that weren't old at all. They were given up for no reason but money.

 

In Beinfest I trust, but he wasn't making deals to improve the ballclub, he was making a market correction, or in other words, a firesale. He was giving away proven production for unproven production, and for a lot of these guys, they were still young enough to produce for a long time.

 

Some of the trades, maybe I'm OK with, but the Beckett Lowell deal, even with Hanley panning out, is enough by itself to call the whole thing a firesale to me. There isn't a prospect in baseball highly rated enough to give up a proven top 10 pitcher in baseball with a World Series MVP under his belt.

The 2003 team had 2 years after their championship to both make it back to the playoffs and bring in the fans. Neither happened and the team was an economic black hole (mostly because the Marlins get no money from parking or concessions).

 

A big bulk of the '03 team was kept together for two more years but they still lost a lot of key guys so they really weren't given a chance either. They didn't re-sign Pudge who was arguably the face of the franchise and IMO the MVP of that post season and Derrek Lee who hit 30 homers in '03 and was a gold glover. Other significant losses included Ugueth Urbina and Brad Penny midway through the '04 season. Any other team would have re-signed Pudge after what he did.

 

This as well. It was kind of a gradual fire sale. The ballclub was already falling apart after the '03 season, it wasn't just kept as is for 2 more years. We never added anyone close to Pudge's impact after '03, and we only finally replaced D. Lee in '05, but were still worse defensively.

The 2003 team had 2 years after their championship to both make it back to the playoffs and bring in the fans. Neither happened and the team was an economic black hole (mostly because the Marlins get no money from parking or concessions).

 

A big bulk of the '03 team was kept together for two more years but they still lost a lot of key guys so they really weren't given a chance either. They didn't re-sign Pudge who was arguably the face of the franchise and IMO the MVP of that post season and Derrek Lee who hit 30 homers in '03 and was a gold glover. Other significant losses included Ugueth Urbina and Brad Penny midway through the '04 season. Any other team would have re-signed Pudge after what he did.

While I agree about Pudge, D-Lee was another thing. Hee Seop Choi, believe it or not, was a HUGE prospect. Urbina was not worth the giant contract he was asking for. I wasn't a fan of the Penny trad either, but it wasn't exactly one sided. Hell, at the time the headlines read "All-Star Lo Duca dealt to Marlins".

The 2003 team had 2 years after their championship to both make it back to the playoffs and bring in the fans. Neither happened and the team was an economic black hole (mostly because the Marlins get no money from parking or concessions).

 

A big bulk of the '03 team was kept together for two more years but they still lost a lot of key guys so they really weren't given a chance either. They didn't re-sign Pudge who was arguably the face of the franchise and IMO the MVP of that post season and Derrek Lee who hit 30 homers in '03 and was a gold glover. Other significant losses included Ugueth Urbina and Brad Penny midway through the '04 season. Any other team would have re-signed Pudge after what he did.

While I agree about Pudge, D-Lee was another thing. Hee Seop Choi, believe it or not, was a HUGE prospect. Urbina was not worth the giant contract he was asking for. I wasn't a fan of the Penny trad either, but it wasn't exactly one sided. Hell, at the time the headlines read "All-Star Lo Duca dealt to Marlins".

 

I was OK with the Penny trade too, but I don't care how huge a prospect Choi was, D. Lee was a gold glover with great offense as well. Choi's best case scenario was D. Lee! He was definitely worth the money, no matter how highly rated Choi was. You're getting too caught up in how highly rated these prospects are, while forgetting the players we gave up were already prototypical at their position!

The 2003 team had 2 years after their championship to both make it back to the playoffs and bring in the fans. Neither happened and the team was an economic black hole (mostly because the Marlins get no money from parking or concessions).

 

A big bulk of the '03 team was kept together for two more years but they still lost a lot of key guys so they really weren't given a chance either. They didn't re-sign Pudge who was arguably the face of the franchise and IMO the MVP of that post season and Derrek Lee who hit 30 homers in '03 and was a gold glover. Other significant losses included Ugueth Urbina and Brad Penny midway through the '04 season. Any other team would have re-signed Pudge after what he did.

Hee Seop Choi, believe it or not, was a HUGE prospect.

 

And it just goes to show you how you can never be 100% sure that a prospect will turn out to be a good Major League player and how lucky the Marlins were to get good ones after the fire sale.

The 2003 team had 2 years after their championship to both make it back to the playoffs and bring in the fans. Neither happened and the team was an economic black hole (mostly because the Marlins get no money from parking or concessions).

 

A big bulk of the '03 team was kept together for two more years but they still lost a lot of key guys so they really weren't given a chance either. They didn't re-sign Pudge who was arguably the face of the franchise and IMO the MVP of that post season and Derrek Lee who hit 30 homers in '03 and was a gold glover. Other significant losses included Ugueth Urbina and Brad Penny midway through the '04 season. Any other team would have re-signed Pudge after what he did.

While I agree about Pudge, D-Lee was another thing. Hee Seop Choi, believe it or not, was a HUGE prospect. Urbina was not worth the giant contract he was asking for. I wasn't a fan of the Penny trad either, but it wasn't exactly one sided. Hell, at the time the headlines read "All-Star Lo Duca dealt to Marlins".

 

I was OK with the Penny trade too, but I don't care how huge a prospect Choi was, D. Lee was a gold glover with great offense as well. Choi's best case scenario was D. Lee! He was definitely worth the money, no matter how highly rated Choi was. You're getting too caught up in how highly rated these prospects are, while forgetting the players we gave up were already prototypical at their position!

No, Choi at best was Mark Teixeira.

 

And no, I'm not getting caught up in anything. I wasn't for the D-Lee trade. But I am trying to show the difference between a fire sale, where you trade guys for nothing, and what we did, were you trade guys for something.

The 2003 team had 2 years after their championship to both make it back to the playoffs and bring in the fans. Neither happened and the team was an economic black hole (mostly because the Marlins get no money from parking or concessions).

 

A big bulk of the '03 team was kept together for two more years but they still lost a lot of key guys so they really weren't given a chance either. They didn't re-sign Pudge who was arguably the face of the franchise and IMO the MVP of that post season and Derrek Lee who hit 30 homers in '03 and was a gold glover. Other significant losses included Ugueth Urbina and Brad Penny midway through the '04 season. Any other team would have re-signed Pudge after what he did.

While I agree about Pudge, D-Lee was another thing. Hee Seop Choi, believe it or not, was a HUGE prospect. Urbina was not worth the giant contract he was asking for. I wasn't a fan of the Penny trad either, but it wasn't exactly one sided. Hell, at the time the headlines read "All-Star Lo Duca dealt to Marlins".

 

I was OK with the Penny trade too, but I don't care how huge a prospect Choi was, D. Lee was a gold glover with great offense as well. Choi's best case scenario was D. Lee! He was definitely worth the money, no matter how highly rated Choi was. You're getting too caught up in how highly rated these prospects are, while forgetting the players we gave up were already prototypical at their position!

No, Choi at best was Mark Teixeira.

 

And no, I'm not getting caught up in anything. I wasn't for the D-Lee trade. But I am trying to show the difference between a fire sale, where you trade guys for nothing, and what we did, were you trade guys for something.

 

Prospects are nothing in baseball until they prove it. Its not like in football, where you can trade for a few draft picks and almost be guaranteed they will be on your roster. Some of the most highly rated prospects in baseball never even last in the majors. Trading for something would be like what the Braves did, getting a serviceable first baseman along with some good young players. All we get are young players.

 

And D. Lee is still arguably better than Texiera, switch hitting and all.

The 2003 team had 2 years after their championship to both make it back to the playoffs and bring in the fans. Neither happened and the team was an economic black hole (mostly because the Marlins get no money from parking or concessions).

 

A big bulk of the '03 team was kept together for two more years but they still lost a lot of key guys so they really weren't given a chance either. They didn't re-sign Pudge who was arguably the face of the franchise and IMO the MVP of that post season and Derrek Lee who hit 30 homers in '03 and was a gold glover. Other significant losses included Ugueth Urbina and Brad Penny midway through the '04 season. Any other team would have re-signed Pudge after what he did.

Hee Seop Choi, believe it or not, was a HUGE prospect.

 

And it just goes to show you how you can never be 100% sure that a prospect will turn out to be a good Major League player and how lucky the Marlins were to get good ones after the fire sale.

 

 

yea thats y i hate having to many prospects because some dont turn out into what there supoose to be

 

yea we got lucky with people like jj, anibal and hanley but we also have failed with people like choi and jacobs and hermida who have not turned out to be as reat as they were supose to be

 

i wouldnt call this a fires sal just a big change in an attempt to make the team better :|

The 2003 team had 2 years after their championship to both make it back to the playoffs and bring in the fans. Neither happened and the team was an economic black hole (mostly because the Marlins get no money from parking or concessions).

 

A big bulk of the '03 team was kept together for two more years but they still lost a lot of key guys so they really weren't given a chance either. They didn't re-sign Pudge who was arguably the face of the franchise and IMO the MVP of that post season and Derrek Lee who hit 30 homers in '03 and was a gold glover. Other significant losses included Ugueth Urbina and Brad Penny midway through the '04 season. Any other team would have re-signed Pudge after what he did.

While I agree about Pudge, D-Lee was another thing. Hee Seop Choi, believe it or not, was a HUGE prospect. Urbina was not worth the giant contract he was asking for. I wasn't a fan of the Penny trad either, but it wasn't exactly one sided. Hell, at the time the headlines read "All-Star Lo Duca dealt to Marlins".

 

I was OK with the Penny trade too, but I don't care how huge a prospect Choi was, D. Lee was a gold glover with great offense as well. Choi's best case scenario was D. Lee! He was definitely worth the money, no matter how highly rated Choi was. You're getting too caught up in how highly rated these prospects are, while forgetting the players we gave up were already prototypical at their position!

No, Choi at best was Mark Teixeira.

 

And no, I'm not getting caught up in anything. I wasn't for the D-Lee trade. But I am trying to show the difference between a fire sale, where you trade guys for nothing, and what we did, were you trade guys for something.

 

They didn't trade for something, they traded for what they thought could become something.

Who the HELL cares what you call it?! Firesale or not, it's better to just discuss who it is we're gonna get rid off.

 

As I told some old-timer at the game yesterday, who we see on the field next year all depends on what philosophy the front office adopts. Are we gonna make a run at it, or are we gonna maintain a low payroll and try to get by until we get a ballpark?

 

I wouldn't completely rule out the idea that they might make a significant increase in payroll to try to remain competitive. The variable that will steer this boat in either direction is what goes down in the stadium talks. I think if we remain on track to open it in 2011, then we will see the front office up the payroll and keep some players. But if the opening of the park is pushed back, and we have to dish out more money to Wayne Huizenga, we will see a 19-21 million dollar team.